Having all witnessed the death of
Libyan strongman Colonel
Muammar Gaddafi under the
bullets of the NTC, many
questions still remain
unanswered. First, who gave the
NATO the authority to kill
Gaddafi? Secondly, what was the
reason behind the attacks in
Libya. Many people will argue
that Gaddafi was a dictator.
Which is very true. But was that
reason enough to want to
depose the leader. Africa has
more dictatorial governments
than democratic governments.
Why hasn’t the NATO intervened
in those other countries? The
truth is, Gaddafi was one of the
few African leaders (In the same
league with the likes of Robert
Mugabe) that have not been
shaken by the strong Western
influences. I do not mean to say
that what Gaddafi did in Libya is
in any way right; but he was not
the first to do it. Neither was he
the last dictator in Africa.
Many people will also claim that
the NATO intervened because of
the oil just like the USA did with
Iraq. Uncle Sam claimed to be
assisting the Iraqi people
depose a dictator. That is what
the international media and the
Pentagon put forward. What
many people don’t know is that
few months before the Iraqi
invasion by the American forces,
Saddam Hussein had stated his
intention to begin trading their
oil using the Euro instead of the
US dollar. This would not have
been honey in the mouth of the
US economy and Bush did what
he did to make sure that Saddam
would not live a day longer to
witness his dream see the light
of day . Could this have been the
case with Libya? Maybe or
maybe not.
Libya has vast oil resources that
have propelled its economy
upwards for many years now. To
say many Libyans were
economically hurt is an outright
falsehood. That is why we have
the cash-induced presence of
OilLibya in Kenya not to mention
the billion shilling plus worth
Laico Regency Hotel. Gaddafi
also built one of the largest
mosques in Africa in Uganda. So
did the NATO countries feel
Libya was growing economically
at a threatening pace under
Gaddafi? Maybe or maybe not. If
that was the case, Mauritius
would have been a better target.
Others may still put in front the
argument that NATO forces
intervened because of the chaos
in Libya and they did so to
protect civilians. There I will
disagree. And this is why. When
Rwanda sunk in a large scale
man kill man showdown, the
USA sat down and watched with
the world as the horror movie
unfolded. That time, President
Bill Clinton made something very
clear in a statement he made to
the press; the USA intervenes
only where it has its interests
threatened. This came shortly
after the President had made a
military attack in Somalia only to
lose a “Black Hawk” aircraft and
several soldiers. This
embarrassing scenario to the
super-power was the inspiration
behind the movie “Black Hawk
Down.” That means that the US
of A had its interests in Libya
being threatened and that’s why
they decided to come in with
such force and determination to
stop Muammar Gaddafi. All they
needed was a little commotion
like it happened. So now the
question of all questions, what
was the main reason why the
NATO forces were so determined
to terminate Gaddafi’s rule?
Gaddafi had stated his wish to
introduce the Gold dinar in use
as the continent’s main currency.
A currency made purely out of
gold. This would have rivaled the
dollar and the euro in the world
markets. Many African countries
were in support of the idea. This
was a few months before the
NATO intervention.
This new currency would have
meant that a nation’s wealth
would depend more on how
much gold they had rather than
how many dollars they
possessed. This did not augur
well with the Pentagon and his
NATO friends. Here they found
their interests under threat. The
oil rich countries would have
become overnight super-rich
economies. Oil is, as they say
black gold. The USA has
remained a consistent bully and
brother (depending on which
side of the table you sit) due to
its strong economy. If Libya had
managed to achieve its intended
plan, it would have been
unwelcome competition in the
global economic powerhouses.
This is because the rich countries
thrive on our poverty. A change
in the “How poor are you” scale
would not have gladdened these
countries. You can already see
what China is doing to them.
Therefore, when an opportunity
occurred like the unrest in Libya,
it was a perfect opportunity to
strike Gaddafi out. Gaddafi may
have been a dictator, but he was
also a revolutionary. He was not
a puppet and that is why he did
not add one more year to the 42
he already had as president.
The NATO forces also made their
message quite clear. “To all
leaders in Second and Third
world countries, we do not want
you growing anywhere near us
or we will hang you like Saddam
or get you shot in the head like

by www.victorbrian.blogspot.com/?m=1

Twitter @victorbrian

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to our newsletter

Click Subscribe to get our latest news and stories straight to your email


Subscribe to our newsletter